- From: Seth Russell <seth@robustai.net>
- Date: Fri, 05 Jan 2001 10:05:43 -0800
- To: "McBride, Brian" <bwm@hplb.hpl.hp.com>
- CC: RDF-IG <www-rdf-interest@w3.org>
"McBride, Brian" wrote: > I'm sorry if I'm sounding like a broken record on this, but I > believe what m&s says is that a reified statement represents > a statement. Ok. > I've been interpreting that to mean that any property which is > true of a statement is true of any reified statement which > represents it, and vice versa. I don't see how you can say that at all. What is true of a representation is not usually true of that which it represents. The word "Rainier" represents a mountain in the state of Washington. It is true of this representation that it is composed of 7 letters; but implying then that the mountain in Washington state contains 7 letters would be an absurdity. Seth Russell
Received on Friday, 5 January 2001 13:01:24 UTC